Dhananjay Kumar vs State Of Bihar and Ors

Vipul M. Pancholi, CJ

Heard Mr. Vikas Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Md. Kurshid Alam, learned AAG-12 for the respondents.

The present appeal has been filed under Clause-X of the Letters Patent of Patna High Court Rules against the order dated 17.02.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 2840 of 2025, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the petition filed by the present appellants/petitioners.

Learned counsel for the appellants mainly contended that though the appellants have made representation before the respondent authorities, till date the representation of the appellants has not been decided. In fact, the appellants are the owners of the land in which, now, the respondent authorities have decided to construct Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan. Thus, the appellants made representation before the respondent authorities. It is further submitted that the learned Single Judge dismissed the petition mainly on the ground that in view of the order dated 07.04.2023, passed by a Division Bench in CWJC No. 3282 of 2023, it is for the authorities to decide where the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan is to be constructed. Learned counsel submits that if the respondent authorities are directed to decide the representation filed by the appellants, then the appellants would be satisfied with the same. Learned counsel, at this stage, further submits that the appellants will file a fresh representation before the respondent authorities, including the respondent No. 6, as per Section 4 of the Bihar Land Disputes Resolution Act, 2009.

If the appellants file the representation within a period of four weeks from today, respondent No. 6 shall decide the same in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.

It is clarified that we have not examined the merits of the case of the appellants.

The appeal stands disposed of.